Jump to content

New Gacha Policy Discussion


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 115 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

For many even posting in this or other hot threads is a Dopamine hit. When you get right down to it, most people spend time in S/L activities for what it does to them on an emotional level. If we are going to start banning certain activities because we don't approve of someone's serotonin, dopamine adrenaline, testerone etc etc spike, then just close S/L and every other game out there. Picking on one only is hypocritical.  

So, are you paying L$100 every time you post, like, comment? No?  Are we all randomly getting a chance at posting/commenting/liking anything in this thread or elsewhere? Nope! There is the difference, we are freely engaging without limits and without a cost. Playing Second Life, being on the internet and engaging with others is not the bad thing and it's inept of you to compare the two. The topic at hand is creators grasping vigoursly at straws to continue to exploit a broken system, stop trying to defend it if you do not have conclusive evidence.  I think I may just start compiling a spreadsheet of my sales from the last seven or so years for some infographics from a "small" creator.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just read the Happy Weekend sale, and Vive Nine has posted one gacha there, separate items, as copy/mod/no trans. Price will increase after the weekend sale is over.

At least one creator that does not have to be dragged kicking and screaming into a SL without gachas.

Edited by Marianne Little
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, hippopotomonstrosesquipedalian said:

Not to mention a big part of social media. How many "likes did I get for that instagram post?" 345648484 likes. OMG!!!!! I'm the best! What, zero likes. No, no, no, no, that can't be true. I just want to die right now.

I hate all of the various social media things.  I think my hate is partly because I am afraid I will not get many likes and it will simply confirm that self-conscious part of me that feels very worthless.  That may also be why I have turned off notifications here in the forums for post reactions and I usually avoid checking reactions to my posts.

Edited by LittleMe Jewell
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, hippopotomonstrosesquipedalian said:

 What, zero likes. No, no, no, no, that can't be true. I just want to die right now.

I die more times out there , or in here, than Dragon's Lair' Dirk ever played anytime anywhere. :|

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

Though I can't find the article at the moment, years ago I read that Microsoft employs game psychologists on the Office design team to increase user engagement with the suite, not necessarily to improve user productivity. One would be naive, I think, to presume that there are no conflicting motivations here. LL, like any other social/gaming platform must walk a line between what's best for the customer and what's best for the business.

This isn't anything new, it's called "marketing" and I could argue that it's the world's oldest profession.

That's something I use in arguments about Gamepublishers/devs becoming "evil", like ActivisionBlizzard, Bethesda, etc.
They all start out with fun games, passion projects, and then they gain success. And in come the people with the suits. Those are bad news. They don't see users wanting a good game, they see numbers and those need to become bigger by any means.
But the worst is when the psychologists enter. Because that is when they tend to become anti-consumer, and try every trick in the book to exploit people so their precious numbers rise more and steeper than before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, hippopotomonstrosesquipedalian said:

Not to mention a big part of social media. How many "likes did I get for that instagram post?" 345648484 likes. OMG!!!!! I'm the best! What, zero likes. No, no, no, no, that can't be true. I just want to die right now.

Ironically this is also deemed and poor for people's mental health and also adds nothing to the argument against Gachas or the Conveyer System.  The bottom line is we're talking about RNG (Randomly generated Numbers) and transactions that involve a monetary value.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
1 hour ago, snowvoice said:

I have a question about this conveyor belt type machine.
It allows the buyer to see what will be available next, but it does not allow him to choose what to buy.
The buyer has to keep buying one item after another that he does not want until it is his turn to get the item he wants.
If the buyer doesn't buy the next item within 10 seconds, he or she will give up the right to purchase the item to someone else.

Question 1: Isn't this system of not letting the buyer choose the product and making them feel rushed by setting a time limit on their decision to buy the product they don't want, gambling?

The creator also claims that the machine has been approved by Linden Lab, the lawyers hired by Linden Lab, and the Vice President of Product Operations for Second Life.

Question 2, is this true?

To anyone who disagrees with the creator, he says, "If you claim to be illegal, dispute Linden in court.

Question 3, Does Linden have a special agreement to protect him?
 

Sorry, but I can't read what is quoted in the tweet.  If there has been any other discussion in the thread about it, I also will not be reading it.  

In direct response to this post referenced above:  This game was presented to me directly with an English write up for approval on it's operation design, and I approved it. It is the mechanic of a conveyor belt system, the same I have described in the FAQ.

 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 3
  • Haha 1
  • Sad 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

I hate all of the various social media things.  I think my hate is partly because I am afraid I will not get many likes and it will simply confirm that self-conscious part of me that feels very worthless.  That may also be why I have turned off notifications here in the forums for post reactions and I usually avoid checking reactions to my posts.

I can TOTALLY relate to that. I'd  write TOTALLY in even bigger letters if I could!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Theresa Tennyson nods and smiles.

Oh, they're all for businesses behaving freely. Until the moment that they start doing something that they don't like...

Yup.  And businesses are free to do what they like,  until they start to apply the same rules for things Republicans dislike. Then their both against State Rights and Business Rights. Because it doesn't suit them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, xAmbiguityx said:

Ironically this is also deemed and poor for people's mental health and also adds nothing to the argument against Gachas or the Conveyer System.  The bottom line is we're talking about RNG (Randomly generated Numbers) and transactions that involve a monetary value.

No, the bottom line is I get a new outfit to soothe myself with. That is why I buy Lindens and shop. The numbers are for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Arielle Popstar said:

No, the bottom line is I get a new outfit to soothe myself with. That is why I buy Lindens and shop. The numbers are for you.

Thanks for your money then, I guess.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

Though I can't find the article at the moment, years ago I read that Microsoft employs game psychologists on the Office design team to increase user engagement with the suite, not necessarily to improve user productivity. One would be naive, I think, to presume that there are no conflicting motivations here. LL, like any other social/gaming platform must walk a line between what's best for the customer and what's best for the business.

This isn't anything new, it's called "marketing" and I could argue that it's the world's oldest profession.

 

21 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

For many even posting in this or other hot threads is a Dopamine hit. When you get right down to it, most people spend time in S/L activities for what it does to them on an emotional level. If we are going to start banning certain activities because we don't approve of someone's serotonin, dopamine adrenaline, testerone etc etc spike, then just close S/L and every other game out there. Picking on one only is hypocritical.  

 

How you two are failing to realize these two things is beyond me.

1) Gambling is harmful.
2) SL developers do not need to sell gachas in order to make a profit.

Let's take another example of something that's also exploiting the reward system for profit, in a very malicious way.
Drugs. One can argue that it's every person's choice to their own body and what they put in it, and thus everything should be legal. We have a lot of research that shows how harmful it is to use certain substances. There is also research showing that they can be helpful for some individuals.

The consensus in most countries is that the highly addictive substances that alter behavior/cognition are too harmful for the users, but also the people that come into contact with them. The people selling drugs count on the users to get addicted and come back for more, and they will go out of their way to try and get these people hooked. It's very manipulative and often misleading without a full disclaimer of what the consequences can actually be. That's why it's illegal.
If you ask any drug kingpin they will probably tell you "well, they had a choice", which is true, but some people only need one hit to go down a slippery slope that changes their entire life. Do we really need these substances so badly that we are willing to risk the harm it will do to people.. for no reason?

You can replace anywhere I mentioned "drugs" or "substances" with "gambling" and "gacha" if it would make it any clearer for you. It's the same issue.

Companies are out to make a profit, yes. I'm a SL developer myself, I have my brand, I make money.
You can make a profit without consciously hurting/exploiting people, that's the entire point.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a very strong feeling that when the legal team actually gets a hold of the information related to the conveyor belt type of machines, they are going to be nixed as well, regardless of what any LL employee might think about them(or their conceptual uses). They skirt the line way too closely to be considered sound and will end up coming under severe scrutiny, they already are if one actually reads the thread. Which the legal team should (not any other team, but the legal team) because their decision should very much be affected by the great number of  very valid concerns raised in this thread by some very intelligent people (I'm not one of them, lol).  In fact, I suspect it will be at least enough to cause issues that it will become one of those "nip it in the butt now, so we don't have to deal with possible problems with it later", we all know this is precisely the route LL takes with things, and often times it is the best route. This is one of those times. 

These machines still possess the predatory "gambling" nature of gacha machines, still possess the same randomness that gacha machines possess, likely still also offer every other aspect of a gacha machine, minus the "don't know what item is next" aspect. But every other aspect that is also putting gacha machines and like systems under a microscope and causing this overall policy change, is still present. 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

 

Google "class action lawsuit gacha loot box" for some insight into the current environment and possible coming problems.

The one I found was about Child Safety in Brazil.  If that's the one, then SL is admitting they allow children into the game that use CC.  Maybe it is another one, or maybe it's making portfolio cleanup decisions in the event, that it does come to pass. Basically a preventing that strike.

And they may not have had the financial resources to work on targeting this through headcounts, code, and potential changes.  There are multiple angles to analyze this.  I'm just used to companies doing it prior to the legislative move, as they hear through the grapevine things are not gong well for them. Or laws that give a 6 month time frame for companies to follow through. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, hairtuss said:

 

 

How you two are failing to realize these two things is beyond me.

1) Gambling is harmful.

True. However this isn't a gambling issue. This is a regulatory issue. Gambling is legal in nearly all the countries that ban loot boxes and gacha. And the forms that are legal are far worse than any habits one may form playing SL's version of gacha.

Edited by Finite
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Patch Linden said:

Sorry, but I can't read what is quoted in the tweet.  If there has been any other discussion in the thread about it, I also will not be reading it.  

In direct response to this post referenced above:  This game was presented to me directly with an English write up for approval on it's operation design, and I approved it. It is the mechanic of a conveyor belt system, the same I have described in the FAQ.

 

I printed out the post that featured that device and going to show it to the person who services the Lotto machine in our bar.  He had to take specialized training regarding gambling rules and such and see if he has opinions on the conveyor.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I for one will not be allowing these vendors to operate in Sims I manage nor in events I operate.  I will also cheer my heart out when we get another "Hey y'all gotta take down your predatory gambling machines again, and once more you have 30 days to do it! Good luck finding another loophole!" Let alone, watch all the same entitled creators scramble find another new cash cow.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 3
  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sukubia Scarmon said:

Well. What can we do if LL is adamant about allowing conveyorbelt-gachas? Not a rethorical question.

I will refuse to patronize or encourage anyone else to patronize merchants that utilize these schemes. I'll also point people to the more intelligent posts here from far more intelligent people than myself on why such methods are, well, horrible ideas. 

It's not much, it will likely have absolutely zero effect whatsoever, but it's what I intend to do. 

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tari Landar said:

These machines still possess the predatory "gambling" nature of gacha machines, still possess the same randomness that gacha machines possess, likely still also offer every other aspect of a gacha machine, minus the "don't know what item is next" aspect. But every other aspect that is also putting gacha machines and like systems under a microscope and causing this overall policy change, is still present.

I suspect that too. In fact it reminds me a lot of how computerized slot machines can re-arrange "lost" reels to entice the player to keep playing because they were "so close to winning".

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, hairtuss said:

 

 

How you two are failing to realize these two things is beyond me.

1) Gambling is harmful.
2) SL developers do not need to sell gachas in order to make a profit.

Gambling to excess is harmful. If you are putting your house up to cover gambling debts then you might need GA. For a great many people (90%?) it is a safe, enjoyable activity that they can easily walk away from when they have gone over the limit they wish to spend. 

Those who market their wares through Gacha have found a marketing niche and are obviously satisfying those who like that sort of thing. I'm not interested in it but I neither judge nor look to stop those who choose it. I might suggest a meeting of Gamblers anonymous if I see they are not feeling good about their purchases but that is only if someone is so inclined.

Quote

You can make a profit without consciously hurting/exploiting people, that's the entire point.

Well if one is expressly hurting/exploiting people then sure, maybe LL could limit that ability when it is reported. When a creators rare's are so rare that there is an obvious problem, it should be dealt with but not by penalizing those who do make it a more fair setup. Maybe these sort of things should have a chart listing the odds of winning.

Edited by Arielle Popstar
spelling, grammar, etc etc.
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shuichi Shinji said:

So claiming that LL, their lawyers and Patch Linden have approved this machine, is a little bold.

I stand corrected, after the latest post from Patch Linden. Not that I like it, there are too many problems with it, but if the main criterion is that you see what you pay for, it seems to be ok from a legal point of view...

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Finite said:

True. However this isn't a gambling issue. This is a regulation issue. Gambling is legal in nearly all the countries that ban loot boxes and gacha. 

 

Okay so. let's clear some things up then.

What is gambling?
"Gambling (also known as betting) is the wagering something of value ("the stakes") on an event with an uncertain outcome with the intent of winning something of value. Gambling thus requires three elements to be present: consideration (an amount wagered), risk (chance), and a prize."


And what is a gacha/lootbox?
"A consumable virtual item which can be redeemed to receive a randomized selection of further virtual items, or loot, ranging from simple customization options for a player's avatar or character, to game-changing equipment such as weapons and armor. A loot box is typically a form of monetization, with players either buying the boxes directly or receiving the boxes during play and later buying "keys" with which to redeem them."


In Second Life, we pay Linden Dollars to receive these randomized items. Linden dollars have a real life monetary value, thus every gacha has a value.

So, to quote the text above where the definition of gambling in a legal sense is:
"Gambling thus requires three elements to be present: consideration (an amount wagered), risk (chance), and a prize."

They're all present in gachas. Consideration (the amount we pay to play), risk (the chance of us winning what we want), and the prize (often a trash item with little to no resale value, that still cost real money).

Gacha is gambling.

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Gambling to excess is harmful. If you are putting your house up to cover gambling debts then you might need GA. For a great many people (90%?) it is a safe, enjoyable activity that they can easily walk away from when they have gone over the limit they wish to spend. 

Those who market their wares through Gacha have found a marketing niche and are obviously satisfying those who like that sort of thing. I'm not interested in it but I neither judge nor look to stop those who choose it. I might suggest a meeting of Gamblers anonymous if I see they are not feeling good about their purchases but that is only if someone is so inclined.

Well if one is expressly hurting/exploiting people then sure, maybe LL could limit that ability when it is reported. When a creators rare's are so rare that there is an obvious problem, it should be dealt with but not by penalizing those who do make it a more fair setup. Maybe these sort of things should have a chart listing the odds of winning.

As a consumer, wouldn't you rather just buy the item you want, for a price that is fair for you and the developer, without running the risk of developing a dopamine deficiency (and all the horrible side effects) or enabling the developer to prey on those who are sensitive to developing addictions/addictive behaviors?


Just curious.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, hairtuss said:

 

Okay so. let's clear some things up then.

What is gambling?
"Gambling (also known as betting) is the wagering something of value ("the stakes") on an event with an uncertain outcome with the intent of winning something of value. Gambling thus requires three elements to be present: consideration (an amount wagered), risk (chance), and a prize."


And what is a gacha/lootbox?
"A consumable virtual item which can be redeemed to receive a randomized selection of further virtual items, or loot, ranging from simple customization options for a player's avatar or character, to game-changing equipment such as weapons and armor. A loot box is typically a form of monetization, with players either buying the boxes directly or receiving the boxes during play and later buying "keys" with which to redeem them."


In Second Life, we pay Linden Dollars to receive these randomized items. Linden dollars have a real life monetary value, thus every gacha has a value.

So, to quote the text above where the definition of gambling in a legal sense is:
"Gambling thus requires three elements to be present: consideration (an amount wagered), risk (chance), and a prize."

They're all present in gachas. Consideration (the amount we pay to play), risk (the chance of us winning what we want), and the prize (often a trash item with little to no resale value, that still cost real money).

Gacha is gambling.

 

I've tried this over and over many pages ago in this thread. However, there are many who disagree in some twisted gymnastic of semantics. You'll never convince them otherwise. I made peace with that fact and gave up arguing the definition.

If we're not agreeing on what gambling is, there's no point trying to discuss whether or not gachas are gambling or not. Logic 100 class taught me that.

I do 100% agree with you, though.

Edited by Katherine Heartsong
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 115 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...